Montage by Yamaha

[DmitryKo]

it's an all encompassing metaphor!

No. "Moore's law" is not a natural law, just a practical observation, and it only talks about the number of transistors, not the costs to produce them.

It's the process node shrinking that enabled the economics of the computing revolution - until it nearly stalled at 20 and 14 nm, and will come to a certain stop at 7 or 5 nm.

"Monolithic 3D IC" is not realy "3-dimensional", rather multi-layer (2 to 4 layers)

What's in a name? I'm certainly not arguing semantics with you here. I only refer to the terminology that the industry utilizes.

For crying out loud... it's not about "semantics" or "terminology", it's about economics!

Again, it's process shrinking that allowed increased computing performance in the same silicon die area, or the same computing performance (and less electrical power) in a smaller die area, at the same or reduced production cost per each chip.

With multilayering, there is no cost advantage anymore, because you still have to produce each layer separately with the usual process. You are not shrinking your transistors to fit more of them on the same die - you are just getting several dies vertically stacked in one package. So the final package will cost proportionally to the number of layers.

No more getting double or quadruple storage capacity or computing performance each several years for the same money.

they're doing it already since 4 years... they're already working on carbon nanotubes

Why not mention quantum computers or nuclear fusion reactors?

There is a long list of technologies that were researched up to the production stage, but never entered the market - and an even longer list of technologies that never even left research labs.

They're working on 450 mm wafers for 15 years now, and lithographic equipment is available since 2005 - do we have a single production ready 450 mm fab, or even any definite plans for such a fab?

No one here on this board claimed that hardware sequencers ever should replace a dedicated DAW

Then there was no sense for you to mention Yamaha's Steinberg.

many users would be very content with simple improvements (such as better editing capabilities like in the M3

Even more users wouldn't care, because they'd just use their PC and/or iPad.

I'm sure Yamaha is planning its business accordingly ( and still makes profits!)

Exactly.

[jimknopf]

Even more users wouldn't care, because they'd just use their PC and/or iPad.

DmitryKo, I completely deny that.

I am one of those users who use their PC and/or iPad, and still would NEVER want a top synth or workstation without AT LEAST the sequencing capabilities of the Kronos.
Two simple reasons, which should be not too hard to understand by the smart Yamaha managers:
- still being able to record ideas on the fly directly at the Kronos while playing
- having comfortable playback options whenever needed. Especially the latter is true for lots of keyboarders playing in cover bands and/or all the small new projects with backing tracks.

The poll we once had here in the forum had the same result as what a lot of feedback in a German forum has shown me, and shown more clearly than I had excpected: for many reasons many keyboarders regard a well useable sequencer, at least for playback purposes, as essential(!) for a modern multipurpose synth or workstation.

With this background I regard Yamaha's design decision in the Montage simply as wrong move, and I am quite sure they will pay for that wrong decision, just like for the in my view overall heavily flawed design of that synth, despite some very nice functions and sounds.

And frankly, I don't care a little bit, how they have managed to make some from my view dead wrong decisions plausible to themselves: I as one of the many possible users just say NO to that design. And among the Yamaha users I know, there are more who are dissatisfied with the overall Montage design, than there are satisfied. Simple as that.

Let's just wait and see how the whole thing will develop in the synth market, and I will look at that development quite relaxed, no matter if I'm right or wrong.

[JPROBERTLA]

I agree and am in the same boat as jimknopf. I was interested in the Montage as an alternative to having 2 Kronos for polyphony reasons. But its limitations are too much to justify $3000. Really don't need (or want) to haul around another keyboard, so the Integra module, or even the Motif module are looking better as alternatives. I'll just sit back an casually observe what happens. Maybe the price will come down (although I seriously doubt it) enough for me to consider it, but only as high-end boost to polyphony to solve my specific problem. It can never replace the Kronos for my purposes.

[marc1]

Dear DmitryKo,

Well, I think we had kind of a bad start and I apologize for being a little too snotty one time or another (I mean that seriously). This is just a forum for mostly music hobbyists and tech enthusiasts like myself, so there's no need to get too sensitive with any of the topics or with differing opinions. So please take the following passage with a grain of salt. I'm just trying to answer the points where I feel you might have misunderstood my original message. Still, your opinion may differ, of course, but I think there's no need to argue on and off any longer and probably most of the forum members will appreciate that.

No. "Moore's law" is not a natural law, just a practical observation, and it only talks about the number of transistors, not the costs to produce them.

Of course, Moore's law is not a natural law. What I meant is that it's become (imho and that of many other scientists) kind of a synonym for human technological progress. And here, still, I will strongly disagree with your view that it's supposedly only applicable to transistors. That may have been the original intention , but there are other fields of technology that saw the same exponential growth (especially all kinds of information technology) and I'm rather optimistic that this trend won't end any time soon.

Why not mention quantum computers or nuclear fusion reactors?

Well, I certainly could have done that, but the discussion was already drifting too far away from the original topic (which is certainly my fault since I brought Moore's law up for discussion).

There is a long list of technologies that were researched up to the production stage, but never entered the market

You're absolutely right about that. But as you may also know, there are other factors too that contribute to the decision to launch a new product, which are not necessarily always economic in nature. Oftentimes there are political and cultural implications involved, which can hinder a product from being ready "yet".

an even longer list of technologies that never even left research labs.

Absolutely!!! See above.

will come to a certain stop at 7 or 5 nm.

That's what they say about silicon transistors. With carbon nanotubes it may work a little longer. Anyway, I'm fairly optimistic that the industry finds a way to keep going for at least another 15-20 years.

Then there was no sense for you to mention Yamaha's Steinberg.

Why? See, a company like Yamaha is not just a manufacturer of hardware synths. They should actually know better, especially when they decide to restrict the onboard sequencer in its functionality (as compared to Motif) but at the same time leave some of the DAW integration behind which the Motif line offered (too). I may be wrong of course (I have to admit that I didn't look into as much detail concerning the Montage as some of the other forum members), but the way I understand it, is that the Montage is not meant to be a true Motif replacement in terms of studio and computer connectivity.

Finally, I just want to say that I think we haven't seen the end of the road for hardware synth/workstation development yet. Their onboard sequencers (if they have one) may never reach the complexity/sophistication of a dedicated DAW (and again, I never intended to suggest that they should), but I for one would also be very content with something similar to the Fantom line sequencers.

There are still people out there who simply like to play the keyboard and when they feel inspired, want to be able to capture their ideas on the spot without necessarily getting too techy. And I hope that some of the companies keep considering that for future products.

Marc

[Kevin Nolan]

Don't agree with you Jimknopf:


Gigging musicians don't want on board sequencers - they want great key action and great sounds

Composers (electronic / EDM / Media) simply do not want an on board sequencer - DAW's cater for that

Synthesists don't care about a sequencer

Yamaha synth fans don't care - Yamaha synths were never about the sequencer


And - the writing is on the wall for Workstation sequencers - it's why Korg - THE workstation manufacturer - haven't put one iota of development into the OASYS / Kronos sequencer since the day of release of 1.0 OASYS. Workstation sequencers are history. If you want one, you're in the minority.



In any case - there IS a sequencer on board! It has a 16 MIDI Track, 130,000 note sequencer, with 64 song, and realtime, overdub and step recording. IT also records Audio recordings onto USB. For sketching (as you flagged you want) - more than adequate! Claiming it doesn't have a sequencer is just perpetuating a false understanding of the instrument!


As said multiple time - many here won't 'get' what Yamaha, or Montage are about. It's a Korg forum. That's OK - but - the negative arguments you perpetuate about the Montage are NOT what a large number of current - and past - Yamaha fan's see. There's unique, Yamaha, features in this instrument - and many are excited.

[Jan1]

Gigging musicians don't want on board sequencers - they want great key action and great sounds
Composers (electronic / EDM / Media) simply do not want an on board sequencer - DAW's cater for that
Synthesists don't care about a sequencer
Yamaha synth fans don't care - Yamaha synths were never about the sequencer.

That is simply YOUR opinion of what certain groups of musicians want and need, and perhaps needless to say that I don't agree with you.

And - the writing is on the wall for Workstation sequencers - it's why Korg - THE workstation manufacturer - haven't put one iota of development into the OASYS / Kronos sequencer since the day of release of 1.0 OASYS.
Workstation sequencers are history.
If you want one, you're in the minority.

Says YOU, and maybe you're right, maybe not. I think workstation sequencers are NOT history at all. Time will tell.
I certainly hope you are wrong, because I like the exploration of the workstation ecosystem without any external dependency, and furthermore it's incredibly handy to have a sequencer in the instrument.

In any case - there IS a sequencer on board! It has a 16 MIDI Track, 130,000 note sequencer, with 64 song, and realtime, overdub and step recording. IT also records Audio recordings onto USB. For sketching (as you flagged you want) - more than adequate! Claiming it doesn't have a sequencer is just perpetuating a false understanding of the instrument!

It has a non-editable recorder onboard and thereby removes one of the most important elements for me in a sequencer.
I would refer to it as a 16-track performance recorder, not a proper sequencer. It's a shame really that Yamaha did not even include basic editing functions, but apparently Yamaha seems to share your idea about the onboard sequencers being redundant.

[Derek Cook]

Don't agree with you Jimknopf:


Gigging musicians don't want on board sequencers - they want great key action and great sounds

Kevin, I respectfully disagree with such a blanket statement, and the assumption about what gigging musicians want and don't want. We all have different needs, that may change with projects.

I usually never have a need for a workstation sequencer in what I do, but last year I was doing a small "synth duo" project of classic 70s/80s songs - just me and a singer. In this project I wanted to take minimal kit out - just the Kronos basically instead of my full Welsh Floyd rig - to get back to the days where I just turn up with a keyboard, plug in and play instead of a 3 hour setup!

Why two people? To have some fun with an old pal and avoid band politics which gets worse the more people you add! So with just me doing the music then backing tracks were needed.

In that guise the Korg Kronos sequencer was brilliant for providing a combination of Audio and MIDI for the backing track.

It did the job admirably, and whilst that project did not go far, I would use the same setup again for a similar fun project.

[SanderXpander]

I never use the sequencer but I always play in full band or just duo/trio without backing tracks. My wife is from Estonia and where budgets are smaller, so are the bands and it's pretty common there for duo or trio formations to play full on party repertoire. They definitely use a lot of sequenced stuff there. Mostly Motif even, I imagine they're quite upset at Montage.

[jimknopf]

Kevin, we just can agree to disagree from A-Z.

1. ALL sequencer feedback I got over the last years, in private from gigging musicians I know, and from several forums' feedback, indicates quite clearly to me, that while some keyboarders don't use hardware sequencers at all, others (and not few of them) still want a sequencer worth calling it. In fact the development has been heading heavily
a) towards click tracked bands, with firm song structures firing backing material during a gig at an increasing number of points
b) towards a steadily growing number of small projects using backing tracks to replace additional musicians - for economic and organizing reasons. Derek's project is no rare exception at all.

Doing both with the Montage, in a combination of midi and audio sequencing, with all it's sequencer limitatons, would be a pain in the you know what.

2. Korg has not further developed the Oasys sequencer in the Kronos, right. But the only writing on the wall I can see far and wide, is that it fits it's limited purpose just as it is: 16 editable midi tracks plus 16 audio tracks with SSD streaming are all needed for
a) on the fly idea scetching without external gear
b) lots of playback purposes
It's no beauty, it has no piano roll, it does not autoload, and of course it was never meant to replace full blown software seuqencers. - But in sharp contrast to the Montage's so called "sequencer" it is one worth calling and doing what it should be able to do.
What the Montage offers, is a truly crippled form of a sequencer reminiscent of 90s level, with a poor limit of 64 songs. Certainly no appopriate offer for 2016 from my view.

You are right, this is a Korg forum.
And you are right, many of us don't really 'get', what the heck the Montage is supposed to be for gigging musicians or others.

But could it be, that the reason is not so much on our side, but rather on Yamaha's? Because the funny thing is, even in the Motifator forum, Montage details are debated critically by Motif users (who love their brand!), just like by Motif users I know - and I can't deny I understand why they are critical.

In the end it's not up to any musician to 'get' what Yamaha wants with the Montage.
It's up to Yamaha to 'get' what musicians, who liked the Motif, or who use Nords, Kurzweils and Korgs, would like to use next!

[Kevin Nolan]

There's no debate on it Jim - you're just wrong in this instance

The hardware MIDI Sequencer as we've come to know it is history - nobody wants it. It's why the 'workstation' is over as a concept. The market is indicating it - Nord never bothered; Yamaha and Roland have abandoned it, Korg are essentially there too.

As said - you're niche on this - I accept there will always be a few who want it - I composed music for several documentaries on my SY99 and QY700 sequencers synced to ADAT in the past - but who would do that these days with DAWs?

For sketching - sure - useful - but - THE drive of workstations was as complete solutions; and they can't compete even with free or near free DAWs like Reaper, let alone Ableton or Logic Pro. It's been long since conceded by - all manufacturers - I accept you may have a nostalgic allegiance to workstation based sequencers, but as said, you're in a very small minority. Of the perhaps 200 (or more) professional musicians I know - not one is using a workstation sequencer. Not one. It would never occur to them.


Yamaha have 'nailed' it in their approach with Montage - they are totally correctly NOT selling a workstation but a flexible hybrid synth / keyboard with superlative sound engines and innovative realtime control - but - have thrown in a very respectable sequencer for precisely the reason you correctly identified - for sketching (actually more likely to capture motion sequences!) .

VASTLY more contemporary and relevant - and HUGELY more valuable today is that they are providing 32 channels of I/O (16 MIDI and 16 Audio ) via class complaint USB. That's BIG! That allows Montage to fully integrate into all DAWs as long as they are on a computer with USB connectivity - for ever more - no drivers needed as with all Roland gear, including ARIA, for example (which will be out of date likely within 5 years or so when Roland stop driver development for it). It even allows for seamless integration of the Montage's 32 effects processors to be used with DAW environments - very nice thank you very much. The way people want it, today.

So I think your criticisms are hugely out of date and outmoded; while, it seems to me, you almost take pleasure in bashing Montage for the sake of it and simultaneously not recognising it's important bang up-to-date features as I've mentioned.

Montage is a smart, contemporary, quality piece of kit - and the issues you raise are 10 years out of date.

Essentially nobody's using even OASYS or Kronos for their sequencers - pop on over to the Kronos forum and take a look - it almost never arises in discussion.

[Derek Cook]

In fact the development has been heading heavily
a) towards click tracked bands, with firm song structures firing backing material during a gig at an increasing number of points
b) towards a steadily growing number of small projects using backing tracks to replace additional musicians - for economic and organizing reasons. Derek's project is no rare exception at all.

Indeed.

I also gig in a band where "use case (a)" also applies.

Pink Floyd, even with duplicate guitar, keys and drums on stage played to backing tracks because of the need for sound effects and because the tempo of a song is crucial to Gilmour's delay driven sound on some songs. As much as I like drummers , it is a rare one who can play like a metronome, as the natural reaction in coming out of fills is to play a little faster, then a little faster.... In "straight" rock songs that is less of an issue, but when the guitar sound requires the tempo to be a certain speed, it can cause havoc.

So in Welsh Floyd we play most songs to a click track, and as well as audio the click track also has a MIDI sequence to drive our DMX controlled light show using DMXIS and their VST plugin which can be controlled by MIDI note messages.

However in this case I use Cantabile on a PC laptop. But there is no reason why I could not migrate that to the Kronos sequencer. The only thing that ever stopped me is the fact that I couldn't stop the Kronos sequence transport's PLAY control from pausing if I accidentally hit it again, which would be a disaster in a big show. At least in Cantabile it is single shot.

So, there you go; two examples, large and small where a gigging musician is using a sequencer, either built in, or a live VST host on laptop.

You could get into the arguments that "proper musicians" will not play to sequences, which is how I initially felt when I learnt that the Floyd tribute band I was trying out for played to clicks, but if Stadium bands like Pink Floyd can do it, well then, I just got used to it.

[Derek Cook]

There's no debate on it Jim - you're just wrong in this instance

The hardware MIDI Sequencer as we've come to know it is history - nobody wants it.

Kevin,

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but, with respect, do not presume that your view is absolute fact that we all must subscribe to, or we are wrong. Is that not a little teensy weensy bit arrogant?

I have clearly set out above a use case, where the Kronos sequencer was a boon to what I wanted to do. Yes, I could have done it in external hardware (like a PC and Cantabile) and a Kronos, but in that case having a "one stop shop" of synth and sequencer was precisely what I wanted for that little duo gig.

And this is me speaking as somebody who is interested in Montage for the sound capabilities (subject to demo) and potential EX5 replacement as a good controller to complement the Kronos, but who still feels that Yamaha could have done so much more.

[Hugo]

Completely agree with Jim Knopf. I won't be buying a Montage unless it's updated with proper workstation features.

[EXer]

The hardware MIDI Sequencer as we've come to know it is history - nobody wants it.

Wrong.

I want it because I use it. And I'm not alone. Anyway, even one person is not nobody.

The Motif onboard sequencer is well specified and useful, but it could not be reused unchanged on the Montage because the new touch screen involves the development of a new user interface.

I believe that's the reason why they dropped the sequencer: IMO they didn't have enough resources to develop a new UI on time for the lauch of the Montage. Let's hope that if there is enough demand they will add this feature in a future OS release.

[Jan1]

Methinks there are quite a few nobodies left who appreciate and need a proper onboard sequencer.
Yamaha did not nail it, they missed it, and all the fanboyism and PR in the world is not going to be able to depict that omission as a special feature.